Evidence Hub

Effectiveness and Safety of Contemporary Drug Regimens for Multidrug- and Extensively Drug-resistant Tuberculosis in Children and Adolescents: A Global Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Kaminyoge W, Simfukwe R, Singini M, Sitali N, Chilunga FP

The Pediatric infectious disease journal, 2026

490 participants

Abstract

Background: Children and adolescents with multidrug-resistant (MDR) or extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis (TB) face major treatment challenges. Although newer all-oral regimens have transformed adult TB care, their use in younger populations has largely been extrapolated from adult studies, despite important biologic and clinical differences. Systematic and up-to-date evidence on the effectiveness and safety of contemporary regimens in children and adolescents is lacking. We conducted a global systematic review and meta-analysis to address this gap.

Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar for studies published between January 1, 2015, and September 1, 2025. Eligible studies included children 0-19 years old with confirmed or presumed MDR/XDR-TB or rifampicin-TB receiving pharmacologic treatment. Outcomes were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis. The primary outcome was treatment success (cure or completion); severe (grade 3/4) adverse events were assessed as secondary outcomes.

Results: We included 14 studies comprising 490 children across 13 countries. Overall pooled treatment success was 89% (95% confidence interval: 84%-93%; I2 = 51.9%). Newer all-oral regimens achieved slightly higher success (91%) than injectable-containing regimens (83%). Severe grade 3/4 adverse event were sparse (7 of 14 studies); events occurred in 21% (95% confidence interval: 13%-33%), most commonly QT prolongation…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 490 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free